Todd Wallack v. Taunton, City of - Police Department (SPR 20241983)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 24, 2024 SPR24/1983 Lieutenant John P. Joyce Public Records Access Officer Taunton Police Department 23 Summer Street Taunton, MA 02780 Dear Lieutenant Joyce: I have received the petition of Todd Wallack, of WBUR, appealing the response of the Taunton Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On May 17, 2024, Mr. Wallack requested “[a] copy of [the Department’s] log of public records requests since Jan. 1, 2019. If [the Department’s] log is only readily available for a more recent period, please provide the log for that more recent period instead.” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR24/1757 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (June 26, 2024). In my June 26th determination, I found that the Department must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the assessed fees are consistent with the Public Records Law. Subsequently, the Department responded on July 10, 2024, providing further explanation of its fee estimate. Objecting to the fees, Mr. Wallack petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR24/1983, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any agency or municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832 • Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Lieutenant John P. Joyce SPR24/1983 Page 2 July 24, 2024 order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. If there are any fees associated with a response, a written good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Wallack contends that “[t]he department said the fee is to redact the records. It cited exemption (a) and a list of statutes, but none of them apply to the records I requested (a log of public records requests).” The Department’s July 10th Fee Estimate In its July 10, 2024 fee estimate, the Department explains that it previously provided Mr. Wallack with numerous responsive records. The Department explains the following: These records include the entire Public Records Log, unredacted, minus the “Request Details” field. This field would need to be manually reviewed for potential redactions and includes over 8000 entries for the time period stated (May 4 th , 2022 – present). This field would need to be reviewed to search and segregate any of the following records, which are required by law to be redacted: Alcohol Treatment Records: G.L. c. 111B, § 11. Conflict of Interest, Request for an Opinion: G.L. c. 268A, § 22. Criminal Offender Record Information: G.L. c. 6, § 167. Delinquency, Sealing by Commissioner of Probation: G.L. c. 276, § 100B. Department of Social Services, Central Registry: G.L. c. 119, § 51F. Department of Youth Services Records: G.L. c. 120, § 21. Drug Addiction Treatment Records: G.L. c. 111E, § 18. Extreme Risk Protection Order Records: G.L. c. 140, § 131R. Hazardous Substances Reports: G.L. c. 111F, § 21. Home Addresses and Telephone Numbers of Public Safety Personnel, Victims of Adjudicated Crimes and Persons Providing Family Planning Services: G.L. c. 66, § 10. Inspector General Investigations, Records: G.L. c. 12A, § 13. Juvenile Delinquency Case Records: G.L. c. 119, § 60A. Mental Health Facilities Records: G.L. c. 123, § 36. Protective Services Records, Aged Persons: G.L. c. 19A, § 23. Rape and Domestic Abuse Reports: G.L. c. 41, § 97D. Records divulging name, home or email address and phone number; persons

Lieutenant John P. Joyce SPR24/1983 Page 3 July 24, 2024 who own, possess or have license to carry firearms; government personnel: G.L. c. 66, § 10B. Sex Offender Registry, Requests for Registry Information: G.L. c. 6, §178I. It is highly probable that records required by law to be redacted are present within the “Request Details” field. As a result, segregation and redaction is necessary and required by law. Additionally, in its July 10th response and in its previous June 3, 2024 response, the Department provides a total fee estimate of $1025, and provides the following information in support of its fee estimate: The Department is required to devote more than 2 hours of time to search for, compile, segregate, redact and/or reproduce the requested records... The search and segregation costs have been calculated using the hourly rate of $25. In order to comply with your request, it will take approximately 43 hours of search and segregation time, based upon the following: 8687 Request Details line items As the Records Access Officer, I have estimated a rate of review of 200 line items per hour. 8687 divided by 200 = 43.45. 43.45 minus the statutory 2 hour exemption for municipalities over a population of 20,000 people = 41.45. I have rounded this down to 41 hours. 41 x 25 = $1025. In light of the Department’s July 10th response, and in conjunction with its earlier June 3, 2024 fee estimate, I find the Department has met its burden to establish that it would take this amount of time to segregate or redact the records responsive to this request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d) (a records access officer may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record). This office encourages Mr. Wallack and the Department to communicate directly in order to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Conclusion As set forth above, I find the Department has met its burden in responding to Mr. Wallack’s request at this time. Any revision to the request would result in the requirement to issue a revised fee estimate. Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed.

Lieutenant John P. Joyce SPR24/1983 Page 4 July 24, 2024 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Todd Wallack